House Democrats walk out - Tulsa World

House Democrats walk out of chamber over treatment
By World Capitol Bureau
4/10/2008 11:45 AMLast Modified: 4/10/2008 1:17 PM

From Wayne Greene's Blog: "We've reached the comic opera stage of the legislative session."
OKLAHOMA CITY - House Democrats walked out of the chamber Thursday morning, angry about their treatment in committee meetings where they have not been allowed to ask questions.

The protest follows Wednesday's refusal by Rep. Ron Peterson, R-Broken Arrow, to allow Democratic members to question why Peterson's committee would not allow parents to speak in a public meeting on an amendment to extend insurance coverage to children with autism.A week ago, Cherokee Chief Chad Smith also was not allowed to speak in a committee meeting where an "English-only" bill was being discussed.

Rep. Chuck Hoskin, head of the House Democratic caucus, said it was bad enough that members of the public were not allowed to speak, but elected representatives also are being denied the right to ask questions in committee and on the floor.Thursday morning, Rep. James Covey, D-Custer City, asked to be recognized on the House floor because he wanted to speak with House Speaker Chris Benge, R-Tulsa, about how committee meetings are being conducted. But he was not recognized."That was the straw that broke the camel's back," Rep. Eric Proctor, D-Tulsa.House Minority Leader Danny Morgan, D-Prague, huddled with Benge and others in the speaker's office. Morgan said Benge agreed to review committee rules and will have an answer on Monday.

Democrats stage walkout - Oklahoman

Democrats stage brief walkout in protest, propose changes

Related Information

Capitol coverage

By Michael McNutt
Capitol Bureau

House Democrats staged a brief walkout today from chamber to protest how Republican-led committees have been treating Oklahomans who have tried to speak before them the past couple weeks.

The walkout lasted about two minutes. Democrats, however, later in the morning left the chamber again for a caucus meeting. They submitted several proposals to House Speaker Chris Benge, R-Tulsa. One suggestion was to require committee chairmen to be consistent in allowing members of the public and all committee members an opportunity to speak.

Democratic leader Danny Morgan said Benge said he would review the suggestions and make a decision Monday whether to submit them to the full House for a vote to amend House rules.

After Democrats returned from their caucus meeting, business was conducted with no further interruptions. The House adjourned for the week before noon. Morgan said House Democrats are angry over the refusal by Rep. Ron Peterson, R-Broken Arrow, to let supporters of a measure that would require insurance companies to cover costs associated with autism speak before his committee.

More than 30 supporters showed up the past two weeks to speak to Peterson's committee, but Peterson through procedural moves killed the measure and denied supporters to speak.

Last week Chad Smith, principal chief of the Cherokee Nation, was denied permission to speak before a House committee that took up a bill that would make English the official language of the state. The chairman of that committee, Rep. Guy Liebmann, R-Oklahoma City, restricted comments to House members. The measure passed out of committee and is awaiting action on the House floor.

Morgan, D-Prague, said House Democrats, who are outnumbered 57-44, also are upset over how some amendments are attached to bills or how some bills are gutted and replaced with language dealing with another issue. Amendments and committee substitutes to bills are supposed to have the same subject as the bill. Committee chairmen make the decisions on whether amendments and committee substitutes are appropriate, Morgan said. Their decisions cannot be challenged on the House floor, Morgan said.

Edmond father pushing for autism help

By Michael McNutt

Capitol Bureau

An Edmond father who has spent the past two years trying to get health insurance for autistic children is leading another push today to get the proposal heard before a House committee.

"I knew the biggest hurdle we would always have would be Rep. Ron Peterson and his committee,” said Wayne Rohde, whose 10-year-old son, Nick, has autism. "That's the history of what he's done — he is the person that stops mandates.”

Rohde has appealed to parents to appear at this morning's meeting of the House Economic Development and Financial Services Committee.

An effort will be made to get language of the proposal, called "Nick's Law,” inserted as an amendment to Senate Bill 1059.

Peterson, the committee chairman, a week ago killed an amendment that would mandate insurance coverage for autism disorders.

Thursday is the deadline for Senate bills to pass out of House committees. Today is the last day Peterson's committee meets to take up Senate bills.

Peterson, R-Broken Arrow, said Monday he was still consulting with the speaker of the House over what to do. He did not return telephone calls Tuesday.

If the measure isn't heard in Peterson's committee, it's possible Nick's Law language could be attached as an amendment to an existing bill.

"The Republicans are clearly trying to kill the autism language where it doesn't get a fair hearing,” said Rep. Mike Shelton, D-Oklahoma City, a committee member who tried last week to get Nick's Law heard by Peterson.

Peterson has authored House Bill 3111, which would place restrictions on new health insurance mandates. It is intended to take a closer look at the cost of insurance mandates to reduce the price, which could offset price increases for policyholders.

Peterson said he's concerned that mandates increase the cost of insurance and make insurance less affordable. His measure did not get heard by a Senate committee. The Senate's deadline to hear House bills was last week.

Negotiations are continuing to keep his proposal alive.

Oklahoman Editorial April 8, 2008

Wed April 9, 2008

At a premium: Mandate debate needs compromise

The Oklahoman Editorial

In a relatively quiet legislative session dominated by a standstill budget, the issue of health insurance mandates has risen to a level perhaps not seen since the mental health parity controversy during the Keating administration.Supporters of mandates related to autism and clinical trials for new treatment modalities are passionate for
Many are relatives of victims of a disease or condition that would be addressed in a mandate. They are thus highly subjective participants in the debate.

On the other side is the principled opposition, one that we share, to mandates in general because of the effect mandates have on health insurance premiums. Supporters typically say a mandate will add only marginally to insurance costs, thereby negating the argument that mandates inordinately hurt the poorest and uninsured by making policies unaffordable.

Let's say that each mandate adds just 0.5 percent to the cost of insurance. With 40 mandates, that's a 20 percent increase. The point is, mandates must be considered as a whole.

Mandate supporters have found a demon in state Rep. Ron Peterson, R-Broken Arrow. A committee whose agenda he controls is cool to the latest mandate proposals. Peterson has ties to the insurance industry. Is he thus a highly subjective party to the debate?

Perhaps, but isn't that also true of lawyer legislators who routinely vote on tort reform bills and other legislation affecting their profession?

Compromise is possible in this debate, but it will take yielding from both sides. Peterson has a common-sense bill to subject proposed mandates to scrutiny before they become law. He believes, and we agree, that the financial and social impact of a proposed mandate should be studied before the mandate takes effect. Treatments that would be covered under the mandate would be vetted according to their efficacy.

Maybe if mandate supporters would work to enact Peterson's proposal, he would be more amenable to their ideas.

Senator Jay Paul Gumm's Statement

The State of Oklahoma

OFFICE OF SENATOR JAY PAUL GUMM

Atoka, Bryan, Coal, Johnston & Marshall Counties

April 8, 2008

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Senator Jay Paul Gumm

State Capitol: (405) 521-5586

Durant: (580) 924-2221

Mobile: (580) 920-6990

Senator Gumm’s “Senate Minute” Column for April 9-15, 2008

OKLAHOMA CITY - Hello again, everyobody! With half the session gone, the seeming inability for a number of issues to cross the partisan divide is troubling.

My bill requiring health insurance coverage for autism diagnosis and treatment and another called “Steffanie’s Law” – requiring insurance companies to continue covering patients participating in clinical trials – ran into partisan roadblocks in the House of Representatives.

In other states, both measures were enacted with bipartisan support. In the Oklahoma Senate – which is divided evenly between Democrats and Republicans – both bills enjoyed bipartisan support. Only when they arrive in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives do they fall victim to partisan politics.

Certainly, there are differences between the parties. Political campaigns are where those differences are and should be discussed. When campaign season is over, and it comes time to govern, the responsibility should shift away from winning elections and toward finding those areas of agreement on issues that affect us all.

Autism strikes Republicans and Democrats alike. Cancer strikes Democrats and Republicans alike. Partisanship should be checked at the door when we are discussing issues relating to health. Working to make Oklahoma a healthier state is in everyone’s best interest – Democrat, Republican and Independent.

On both the autism and clinical trial insurance bills, “no” is the only answer we have thus far received from the House committee chairman who is single handedly holding them up. He has never said to the media, “I am opposed to these bills, but here is another idea how to help these families.”

None of us who are fighting for these families is so inflexible that we would not look at another answer. “No,” however, is simply unacceptable – for whatever the reason. These bills both make sense; both will improve the quality of life for thousands of Oklahomans – and in some cases they might even save lives.

If we cannot help families facing the most difficult health issues of their lives, then I truly do not know why we are here. The phrase “family values” often gets tossed around in political discussions, but I do not know how anyone can talk about “family values” if they do not support issues that value families.

When it comes to standing up for the people of Oklahoma, I will always employ every legislative means at my disposal. While that tenacity has been criticized on the editorial pages of one of the major metropolitan newspapers, I see it as a fundamental part of being a lawmaker.

For me, the battle comes down to this: If we cannot enact policies to help families facing health challenges like autism or cancer, then we will have a difficult time enacting policies that help us all. This battle is about Oklahoma’s soul and Oklahoma’s families, and no partisan political interest should trump either.

Thanks again for reading the “Senate Minute,” have a great week and may God bless you all.

Tulsa World - It's Time

It's time:

Insurance should provide coverage for autism

Apr 07, 2008 (Tulsa World - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX)

Seven years ago Indiana passed a law requiring insurance companies to provide coverage for autism. Since then 17 states have passed similar legislation.
Last week, Arizona joined the list. Louisiana, Mississippi and Connecticut have bills under consideration. So does Oklahoma. Several weeks ago, "Nick's Law," named for 10-year-old Nick Rohde, an autistic child from Edmond, passed in the Senate. Now supporters are trying to get the bill out of a House committee. This is not an inconsequential matter.

The bio-neurological disorder occurs in one in 150 births and affects up to 1.5 million Americans. The cost of life-long care can be reduced by two-thirds with early diagnosis and intervention. In a decade the annual national care costs will be up to $200 billion.

The bill did not make it on the agenda of the House Economic Development Committee meeting Thursday. But parents of children affected by autism who had showed up to support "Nick's Law" did not leave and instead hung around to answer questions from lawmakers during breaks in the meeting and afterward.

Fortunately Nick's Law is appended to another bill set to come up

in the Economic Development Committee. Let's hope it can be heard and that committee members will have the courage to vote for it.

For the families of children with autism, the bio-neurological disorder is as real as heart disease, more prevalent than childhood cancer and often difficult to treat. Obtaining insurance coverage for psychological and neurological disorders has never been an easy sell in Oklahoma.

It took years for lawmakers to recognize that mental health treatment deserved coverage parity with other illnesses.

Our insurance industry is not heavily mandated. According to the Tulsa Autism Foundation the insurance industry's own policy group reports that autism insurance coverage would increase costs by less than 1 percent.

Mandates affecting the state insurance industry must be scrutinized carefully with an eye toward fairness. Why should autism be excluded? Lawmakers should seriously consider authorizing coverage for this devastating disorder, the fastest-growing developmental disability in the nation

The Oklahoman's editorial on Nick's Law

In the Saturday, April 5, 2008 edition of The Daily Oklahoman, a brief editorial appeared criticizing Senator Jay Paul Gumm for his continued efforts to require autism diagnosis and treatment be covered by health insurance policies in Oklahoma. The editorial has drawn significant response in the "Comments" section of the newspaper's website at www.newsok.com (the direct link to the editorial is http://newsok.com/article/3225682/1207359531). The editorial and comments follow:

---

The stuff of mandates

There's more than one way to skin a cat, we were told before such a saying became uncomfortable in the age of animal rights sensitivity, and there's more than one way to get an autism coverage insurance mandate into state law. Actually, three ways — so far. State Sen. Jay Paul Gumm, D-Durant, is passionate about the autism mandate. When Gumm's bill requiring the mandate didn't make it out of a Senate committee, the bill's language was transferred to no fewer than three bills. One dealt with an insurance premium tax credit and another with a firefighter pension and retirement system. The third actually dealt directly with insurance coverage. As of Friday, it appeared none of the three was going anywhere. We've long been critics of coverage mandates, but if this is a good thing, let's do it in a bill about the mandate rather than stuffing it inside the skin of other bills.

---

Comments:

· I read with interest your editorial, 'The stuff of mandates,' in the Saturday Oklahoman. I am one subscriber who strongly differs with your views. You implied that Senator Gumm's actions were inappropriate. Attaching amendments to other bills is not unprecedented, and an amendment can't be attached to a bill without a majority vote in the senate. You state that Senator Gumm "is passionate about the autism mandate." GOD BLESS HIM!! He has listened to the hundreds, if not thousands, of Oklahoma families who desperately need the help this bill would provide and who just want to be heard. Senator Ron Peterson has thus far maneuvered and successfully blocked every attempt to try to give this bill a fair hearing. Is it too much to ask that it just be heard? Senator Gumm, while following the rules, is just simply using every method at his disposal to try to get a fair hearing for this bill. As a Republican I can understand your philosophy on mandates. However, I think it is wrong to assume that they are all without merit. Sometimes they are absolutely necessary. It is appalling to me that the most diagnosed illness in children today (one in every 150) is not covered by insurance in Oklahoma. I am the grandmother of a child with autism, so, of course I share Senator Gumm's passion for wanting to help these children. (I recently sent a letter to "Your Views" regarding this subject.) I doubt this letter will change any minds or hearts, but perhaps if you editorial writers could step into the shoes of a parent coping with an autistic child for even one day, you might be convinced to help rather than criticize the way we are trying to "skin this cat!!!" Donna Greve
Donna, Oklahoma City - Apr 5, 2008 9:44 PM

· Robyne stated "Oklahoma rates higher than the national average of people covered by Medicaid. It appears our legislators prefer the “government” pick up the tab for our healthcare. By defending the anti-insurance mandate mantra, our legislature is driving Oklahoma to state run health care." This is so true. Many of the parents of children with autism are paying for private insurance, but receive no coverage for our children. The cost of intervening and treating these children now is miniscule compared to the cost of caring for them as adults ($3.2 million over their lifetime). Why would you be against something that would help these children? It can't be cost. The Insurance Industry’s own policy group CAHI.org reports that autism insurance coverage will cost less than 1%. It must be because you don't understand. You don't understand the heartache of these parents who see their children locked in a world of their own. Parents who once saw their child playing, talking and laughing, then saw that child disappear before their eyes. Parents who are helpless because they have exhausted their finances and still have so far to go. Parents who have seen and heard of other children who have recovered, or at least gotten better. Yes, it must be because you don't understand. Because to understand and still oppose this legislation, which would help so many children and families, would just be cruel. If you don't support it because you don't believe, at least support it for self-preservation. Because with each passing day, more children are being identified and added to our state medicaid rolls. Your tax dollars at work!
vicki, Guthrie - Apr 5, 2008 7:53 PM

· In your editorial 'the stuff of mandates', you indicate that 'we have long been critics of mandates', and since this paper refuses to print letters to the editor on this topic, allow me to provide your readers with some information. Oklahoma has not passed an insurance mandate since 1999 yet our premiums continue to rise while reducing coverage. The insurance industry is lobbying to convince our legislators that mandates will increase the cost of insurance, resulting in more people becoming uninsured. In actuality, when Nick’s Law is passed, Oklahoma will see droves of families becoming insured so that their children with autism will finally be able to receive the necessary treatments to become independent adults. Without treatment, these children will be forced through the public school system, unable to read, write, or communicate their most basic needs. A 2006 Harvard study concluded the lifetime cost to care for a child left untreated at $3.2 million. A child having had no treatments, once they turn 18, will be added to the state welfare roles at an estimated cost to each Oklahoma taxpayer of $700-$800/year. The Council for Affordable Health Insurance (CAHI) lists Oklahoma as one of the least mandated states in the nation. At the same time we lead nearly all states in the number of uninsured. So what’s really driving insurance costs in Oklahoma? It can’t be mandates. Maybe it is the personal wellness practices or the excess use of alcohol, tobacco, and rise in obesity rates. Oklahoma rates higher than the national average of people covered by Medicaid. It appears our legislators prefer the “government” pick up the tab for our healthcare. By defending the anti-insurance mandate mantra, our legislature is driving Oklahoma to state run health care. Since 80% of these children are under the age of 15, per the NAA, without effective treatment, the first big wave of these children will be applying for state and federal aid in less than 4 years. This will coincide with the first big wave of retiring baby boomers. As one state senator said, it is the perfect storm. Autism, the quiet epidemic, will be the loudest sonic boom ever heard! Robyne Rohde
Robyne, Edmond - Apr 5, 2008 2:24 PM

· · Where are your questions regarding the committee chair's efforts to kill a bill that would help thousands of Oklahoma's most vulnerable children while introducing a bill protecting insurance companies from mandates? (HB 3111) Why are you not questioning Rep Peterson's position against all insurance mandates? What does Rep Peterson suggest we do to insure these children appropriate therapies and treatments while already having insurance in place? Yes, Nick's Law was attached to three bills. All which took the majority vote of the full senate and is within the rules to do so. I want to thank Sen. Gumm for standing up for these children. Also Rep. Brown, Collins, and Shelton for taking on this cause. Wayne and Robyne Rohde for leading us on this issue. Shame on Rep Peterson for not even allowing this bill to be heard. Shame on the other committee members who sat silent while he did so. Shame on you for remaining quiet on this issue. This article disrespects all who are fighting with everything they have for this bill. Where are the articles about the struggles of Oklahoma families living with Autism? About the children who deserve this coverage? Instead you question our methods and brush over Rep Peterson's total refusal to allow this bill a fair and appropriate hearing. I would ask that you look into this issue in more depth so all sides are heard. Laurie Edmond Oklahoma
Laurie, Edmond - Apr 5, 2008 1:14 PM

· There are thousands of Oklahoma families counting on Senator Gumm to represent us in our endeavor to secure insurance coverage for our children. Our attempts to be heard in committee have resulted in mere pats on the back and comments of, "Sorry, this is just the way policy-making works..most bills just never get heard". As noted by the Rohde's submission, tactics to pass legislation are employed by ALL of the legislators....thank goodness we have Senator Gumm's expertise on our side. He is helping us be noted and heard- something you might consider doing yourself. Anne Marie Liles
Anne Marie, Oklahoma City - Apr 5, 2008 12:55 PM

· Autism and related disorders represent fastest growing health threat to children in the U.S. Senator Gumm, the Rohdes, and ideed all the parents of children affected by autism are to be commended for their efforts in helping make proven therapies and treatments more easily accessible to those affected by autism. Your comments make it seem that these efforts were less than fully legitimate or at least somewhat underhanded. Rather, the methods used to further this legislation was completely appropriate within the rules governing our legislative process. Instead of criticizing, why not advocate for the legislature to do what is right and good for the children and families of Oklahoma!
Paul, Edmond - Apr 5, 2008 11:59 AM

· I want to correct your statement on "stuff of mandates". First, the 3 bills that Nick's Law was amended to all passed the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support. According to Senate rules, all bills must deal with Insurance to allow an amendment of another insurance matter. You did not mention that fact. Nor will you publish letters to the editor supporting Nick's Law or other health care mandates. Also, please note and keep for your future reference, due to the evenly split Senate, amending legislation is a very common and acceptable practice. Yet you feel it to be a cheap end around on this case. We are working within the rules of the legislature to advance medically necessary legislation for thousands of children who can not speak for themselves and for the thousands of parents and families of Oklahoma that you will not their viewpoint to be heard!
Wayne Rohde, Edmond - Apr 5, 2008 8:45 AM